Tom Christiansen writes: > Your coquettish plot to reveal the desperate yearning of your > nethermost alimentary canal for multiply redundant new egresses is > neither charming nor And that's offensive. Please act like a grown-up. Stephen cast the first stone, but that's no excuse for you to reply with a boulder. Nat (hint: grown-ups would apologise at this point)
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions from core Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions from core John Porter
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions from core Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions from c... John Porter
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions fr... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... John Porter
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Larry Wall
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Stephen P. Potter
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Larry Wall
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions fr... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions from c... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric functions fr... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Hildo Biersma
- Re: RFC 155 - Remove geometric function... Dan Sugalski